Results for “proposal”

Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation tasks.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a Research Pilot project needs an experiment proposal from a weak or bounded project claim.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Sales enablement, technical presales and deal acceleration for B2B SaaS revenue teams. Use this skill when planning outbound campaigns, running discovery calls, building deal strategy, creating battle cards, writing proposals, responding to RFPs, preparing a product demo, scoping a proof of concept or pilot, answering a security questionnaire or the AI annex buyers now attach to it, executing sales sequences, coaching qualification, or deciding what the website's AI chat agent is allowed to say. Also triggers on: outbound, cold outreach, reply handling, reply classification, out-of-office replies, auto-replies counted as replies, our reply rate is inflated, prospect replied remove me, opt-out by reply, is this list ready to send, launch readiness, CRM segment outbound, we emailed a current customer, outbound hit an open opportunity, ownerless leads, prospects engaging our competitors, competitor connections, displacement list, is this personalization creepy, can we mention they visited our site, signal freshness, deal strategy, pipeline, battle card, objection handling, common objections, why do we keep hearing this objection, mine call transcripts for objections, objection register, proposal, RFP, discovery call, MEDDPICC, sales sequence, qualification, sales engineer, solutions engineer, presales, demo plan, demo script, POC, proof of concept, pilot success criteria, technical evaluation, technical win, security questionnaire, vendor security review, SOC 2 questionnaire, AI security questionnaire, AI annex, AI vendor due diligence, the buyer is asking if we train on their data, do you train on customer data, which model do you use, model provider sub-processor, AI subprocessor disclosure, where does inference run, can the customer turn the AI feature off, AI-CAIQ, CSA AI Controls Matrix, ISO 42001, ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF, EU AI Act Article 50, are we a provider or a deployer, AI feature disclosure, our model vendor changed and nobody told the buyer, technical objection, mutual action plan, MAP, close plan, mutual close plan, buyer enablement, the deal is stalled, deal stalled after the demo, how do I get this deal to close, close date keeps slipping, JOLT, buyer indecision, no-decision loss, website chatbot, chat widget, AI chat agent, AI SDR, inbound AI SDR, conversational marketing, live chat, what should our chatbot be allowed to say, our chatbot quoted the wrong price, the bot promised a discount, do we have to disclose it is AI, EU AI Act chatbot disclosure, chatbot handoff to sales, chat transcript review, prompt injection on our chatbot, Drift, Qualified, Intercom.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation tasks.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Triage the Gaia issue backlog and skill-batch intake queue. Use this skill when someone asks to: "triage issues", "clean up the issue tracker", "review the backlog", "close stale issues", "process the intake queue", "review skill-batches", "evaluate draft skill proposals", "approve or reject pending skills", "is this issue still valid?", "what's clogging the backlog?", "run a triage pass", or /gaia-triage. Covers two workstreams: (1) GitHub issue lifecycle — identifying resolved, stale, or need-more-info issues and acting on them via gh CLI; (2) skill-batch intake — evaluating draft proposals in registry-for-review/skill-batches/ and routing them toward promotion or rejection. This is the gatekeeping step before new skills enter the canonical registry; and (3) a cross-repo triage sweep — sizing, P0-P4 prioritization, umbrella/epic synthesis, and assignment across every gaia-research org repo, on the one headquarters tracker.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Triage and classify pending Gaia skill intake batches in registry-for-review/. Use for gaia push intake proposals, draft skill batches, and deciding whether proposals should proceed to canonical curation. This skill is read-only and never promotes skills itself.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation tasks.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Manage architecture RFCs: create, review, list, update, and transition status. Use when user mentions "RFC", "technical proposal", "architecture proposal", or wants to draft, review, list, update, or change status of RFCs.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Audit a grant management system for proposal workflow efficiency, deadline tracking, budget-narrative alignment, outcome reporting, compliance readiness, and win rate optimization. Use when reviewing nonprofit grant software, building a grants CRM, analyzing proposal pipelines, or evaluating funder reporting tools.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

How to write comprehensive architectural proposals that drive alignment before code is written

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Autonomous comprehensive refactoring. Three-phase pipeline — Phase 1 /refactor (tactical, loops internally to convergence) → Phase 2 loop of /review-arch + /implement-batch until architectural findings converge below a severity floor (default HIGH+) → Phase 3 /refactor (catches tactical issues introduced by restructuring). Auto-approves /review-arch ticket proposals; pulls the andon cord on contested findings, breaking-change proposals, repeated implementation failure, or Phase-2 hard-cap exhaustion (5 architectural iterations).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Autonomous bug-elimination loop. Iteratively invokes /bug-hunt and /implement-batch until findings converge below an operator-specified severity floor. At termination, runs /review-test scoped to the run's new reproducing tests and fixes quality issues above the floor. Auto-approves /bug-hunt and /review-test ticket proposals; pulls the andon cord on contested findings, repeated implementation failure, hard-cap exhaustion, or breaking-change proposals. Optional /refactor finisher.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation tasks.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Automate Better Proposals tasks via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

/brainstorm のユーザーストーリー品質を INVEST 基準で軽量チェックする。proposal.md 生成前にストーリーの構造的品質を確認し、問題があれば対話で改善を促す

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Create and publish a recurring client-facing deliverable — SEO or analytics monthly, project status report, audit results — as a branded live page with view tracking. Use when the user says "client report", "monthly report for", "status update for the client", "send this to my client". Not for one-off research shares (use report-publisher) or proposals (use proposal-tracker).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Turn research, analysis, or any markdown the agent just produced into a live, beautifully designed web report with a shareable tracked URL via ReportRoom. Use when the user says "publish this", "make this shareable", "turn this into a report", "put this on a page", or wants findings to live beyond the chat. Not for recurring client deliverables (use client-reporter), slide decks (use deck-publisher), or proposals that need view alerts (use proposal-tracker).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

At the close of an epic (or a difficult issue), post a postmortem roundup comment — what went well, what was hard (backed by evidence), and 1–3 concrete proposals to improve the skills/flows — then offer to turn accepted proposals into their own `workflow`-labeled tasks, and end with a `🔭 Next` handoff (a paste-ready next-session prompt + the next epic to start). Use at epic close, after the "verify the whole thing" rollup, or when asked to "do a retro", "postmortem this epic", "what did we learn", "how do we improve the workflow".

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

戦略企画の専門スキル。中期経営計画、新規事業企画、事業ポートフォリオ分析を支援。 SWOT/PEST/Porter 5F分析、ビジネスモデルキャンバス、BCG/GE/Ansoffマトリクスなど MBA標準の戦略フレームワークを活用した体系的な戦略立案を行う。 Use when creating strategic plans, business proposals, portfolio analysis, or when applying strategic frameworks like SWOT, PEST, Porter's Five Forces, BCG Matrix. Triggers include「中期経営計画」「戦略企画」「事業ポートフォリオ」「SWOT分析」 「新規事業企画」「ビジネスモデル」「競争戦略」「成長戦略」

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

This skill should be used when creating professional presentation materials, slide decks, or proposal documents following FUJISOFT America's corporate template standards. Triggers include requests like "create a presentation", "make slides", "prepare proposal materials", "FUJISOFT template", or when MARP-format Markdown presentations are needed with consistent corporate branding. The skill provides a complete MARP template with CSS styling, visual design components, and quality assurance workflows.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Converts a priced estimate spreadsheet into a DRAFT statement of work populated from the user's own SOW template, after checking that line items, hours, rates, subtotals and the grand total add up. Returns the populated SOW and a validation report as Markdown, flags every discrepancy and marks missing fields TBC. Use when the user asks to "turn this estimate into an SOW", "build the statement of work from the pricing workbook", "convert the quote into a scope document", "populate our SOW template from the estimate" or "draft the engagement document from the rate card". Do not use for reviewing or editing an existing SOW, use contract-review-pack instead; for a proposal before pricing is fixed use proposal-skeleton; for RFP or tender answers use rfp-response-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or vendor contract in character as a Head of Procurement archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage or clause, commercial risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "review this from a procurement angle", "what would procurement say about this proposal", "pressure-test this vendor contract commercially", "find the holes before the sourcing committee" or "check the renewal terms like a Head of Procurement would". Do not use for liability, IP, regulatory or signing-authority questions, use general-counsel-reviewer instead; for whether the spend fits the budget, use cfo-reviewer; for vendor security, use ciso-reviewer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Proposes the piping content a P&ID adds to an accepted PFD process model: line inventory with off-page continuity and required ancillary lines, line identification elements per the project line numbering procedure, connection items at nozzles matched to a quoted schedule, per quoted standards, specification break questions and observations. Every proposal cites its source and revision; no source, no proposal; never sizes a line or selects a class. Use when the user asks to "run the piping enrichment", "start the discipline enrichment", "list the lines the P&ID adds to this PFD" or "fill the line identifiers from the numbering procedure" after gate G2. Do not use for instruments, loops or instrument tags, use instrumentation-and-control-enrichment instead; do not use before gate G2, use process-model-check. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Runs twice in a PFD to P&ID job. Part 1, before gate G3, validates the discipline proposals for provenance, UNKNOWN handling, conflicts, prohibited content and cross-section consistency and returns results and blocking items. Part 2, before gate G5, assembles the review package, with job header, gate record, every register and proposal, consolidated UNKNOWN list, feedback log and closing statement. Use when the user asks to "validate the enrichment", "run validation before G3", "assemble the review package" or "build the G5 package". Do not use for the readiness map, use pid-tool-readiness-mapping instead; do not use to produce a missing discipline section, use the discipline skill that owns it. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.